Fanatique Demon

AND… they brush their teeth with their right hand.

The surnames are movie stars?

You have no idea how happy I am that you didn’t say he took it at its highest point. Thank you, LordTravis

Ok, I admit that was a guess. But right, yes?

A found a few… They all have first names and surnames; They all brush their teeth with their right hand; They all kicked a goal after the siren to win a game in their backyards.

Thanks again, Rusty.

Maybe he’s our barometer?

Thanks Jaded. Where did you find that, please?

I’m right there with you, 22. At age 70, I have about 65 years of support for the Demons I can recall. So, after a great first 10 years, my optimism has been beaten down, down and down. But the Demons aren’t the only ones with the form slump. I was seven games clear in my little tipping competition just three weeks ago. Since then I’ve come back to the field, not just with the two Melbourne losses. I’ve found it hard to pick winners at all. I must be too much in synch with this team. Come on boys, snap out of it!

Thanks Rusty. If you just look at the stats you’d think Oliver, Petracca, Harmes - all rated in our top 8 for the day - played well. But I think the midfield let us down badly. Perhaps with the way these stats are compiled we need the midfield to fill out the first four or five places. Not May, Salem, Lever and Rivers. Crucial as those four backs are, the engine room has to do its job.

I hate to say it, but Kozzy needs a rest. Or a rocket.

Umpires: not the reason

Thanks for sharing this. Too bad our club didn’t show respect by wearing black armbands.

6… Salem 5… T Mac 4… Gawn 3… May 2… Fritsch 1… Lever

Thanks, Joeboy. Some order restored.

An even bigger mystery is how Demonstone finds the time to research/compile the quiz. Good work!

We were exposed when Essendon took the ball through the centre of the ground. Similar to how Adelaide beat us. Other teams will have noticed this and we need to rectify the problem before the GWS game.

6 May 5 Lever 4 Langdon 3 Salem 2 Petraaca 1 Hunt

I’ve not been well this last week. AND THIS ISN’T HELPING!

The muesli.

If we want someone on the bottom of the pack to force a ball-up, Nathan’s our man. But I think our game plan is a bit more sophisticated than that. Good luck to him, but he’s not best 23 unless we get a few injuries.

I find this strange.

Who isn’t?

This whole thing about the action versus the outcome will have to change eventually. Intent and action will become the most important part of the review. It’s not often I agree with Robbo, but he made the point on AFL 360 that DeGoey’s action on Oliver was far worse than Mackay’s on Clark. DeGoey had no interest in the ball and both players were lucky that Oliver jumped straight up and took his free kick. DeGoey got away with a one week suspension. Mackay broke Clark’s jaw in three places but at least he was going for the ball.

I’m in two minds, as I am sure the AFL is. At the time of the incident I thought it was fair enough and just unlucky that Clark was injured. Then I saw the incident on David King’s review (First Crack?). Mackay ran from the opposite direction at speed and must have known a collision was inevitable. He had time to change his actions. Now I’m no lawyer, but I have closely followed Better Call Saul. If both players had done exactly the same but Mackay was the injured party, would Clark be going to the tribunal? If the tribunal finds against Mackay, it will need to define specifically which aspect of his behaviour was the problem. And it must not be the same as Clark’s action.